Why is Korea in the game?

[Parmenion]

Sorry but scientific discoveries and great works are individual works. You can't credit a civilization for what a person or persons did.

We don't have the English Civilization because of Shakespeare nor the Germans because of Albert Einstein. What is it that makes the civilization great?

What you proceeded to give me were individual discoveries and works. So no I can't buy it.

A long-standing project, ok I'll give you that like a wonder or another national achievement like conquest.

A few brilliant citizens do not make a brilliant civilization.

Sorry Bast, but I disagree. If you don't think that it's a given necessity for a civ to have made discoveries or great works then virtually any nation could be included in the game.
The huge nation of Brazil has lots of cities, and is possibly a large market for Firaxis to sell the game, yet it isn't included as an official Civ. Why? Because I can't think of that many scientific discoveries or great works that the Brazilians have accomplished.
[Please forgive me if I'm wrong. I'd love to be enlightened on this matter.]

I see what you are trying to say, that such things are made by individuals and not by civilizations, but what isn't?
You could say that we should remove many of the great wonders because they were built by individuals. The Sistine Chapel was painted by Michelangelo, not the anachronistic nation of Italy, yet it's included in the game.

A civilization's achievements are due to it's scientists, engineers, prophets and warlords, so yes, a few brilliant citizens can make a brilliant civilization.
If it weren't for the likes of Newton, Darwin, Shakespeare, Churchill, Drake, Nelson and countless other individuals, would the English civilization be as accomplished as it is? I would argue that in such a world where some of these people didn't exist, Firaxis wouldn't have considered including them as a Civ in the game (financial reasons aside of course.)

 

[Bast]

The huge nation of Brazil has lots of cities, and is possibly a large market for Firaxis to sell the game, yet it isn't included as an official Civ. Why? Because I can't think of that many scientific discoveries or great works that the Brazilians have accomplished.

So what about the Mongols? What scientific discoveries did Mongols make?

Also, the modern nation of Israel is making huge contributions to science and is only of the most technologically advanced countries in the world. Where are they?

 

[ParkCungHee]

I believe a village doesn't qualify as a city even if you construct a stockade around it. City is a megalopolis or something of that size.

Those aren't houses in the Sketches, they're long houses. Each of those holds about 30 to forty families, and its a relatively minor city in the sketch. The reason we don't think of Iriqoi cities is because they were all destroyed.

 

[Parmenion]

So what about the Mongols? What scientific discoveries did Mongols make?

Also, the modern nation of Israel is making huge contributions to science and is only of the most technologically advanced countries in the world. Where are they?

I've no idea why Firaxis thought to include the Mongols (but see my initial post regarding them) or why they excluded Israel. I was just giving you my opinion on what should have been the inclusion strategy.

I also would argue that Israel should be in the game. In Civ3 I modded them in myself.

So far, my two-point theory stands as correct. Whilst there are obvious examples of wrongly included or excluded civs, I believe the theory is a valid one.
One could argue that there would be too many civs in the game if Firaxis had used my theory, so I guess they had to cut some of the numbers down. Excluding the Hittites wouldn't affect sales, whilst missing out the Americans or Japanese certainly would - all financially-related cynicism aside for a moment.

I'm interested to see if anyone can add anything else.

 

[gettingfat]

I find it interesting people consider both Mongols and Koreans don't deserve to be legitimate "civilizations". And it takes Firaxis forever to grant the SE Asia a shot. It looks like the whole East Asia had only Chinese and Japanese being civilized enough and everybody just fed off from these two. Does it make sense?

Meanwhile, half of the Euro civs are in the game even many of them have relatively short history, but because people here know their history and can recognize their difference in culture, people consider each of them unique and consider them not interchangeable. Many in fact push to having more (e.g. Poland).

From the perspective of an Asian, I equally can't tell much difference between different European civ. People here claim Mongols are just a bunch of barbaric pillagers with not much culture and they just feed on the civs they conquer, but to me this also applies to the Vikings, but since I know Mongol more I see the uniqueness in Mongols and feel they deserve more than Viking.

And in the eyes of people like me I see Netherlands as a 2nd-tier European civ which is quite successful right now like Korea. Yes, they had a good colonial empire, but to me they are not the most successful colonizing force, they were just feeding off from the big guys and rode the wave of colonism at the right time. In a sense it is still a 2nd-tier. At least Koreans have a longer and richer history. Staying as an unique and independent state when located between the two powerhouses in Chinese and Japanese in itself is an amazing task.

Yes, I'm ignorant because I'm Asiano-centric, but people should ask themselves are they somewhat too Euro-centric as well?

 

[PimpyMicPimp]

They have built an empire on Battlenet.

 

[Koelle]

Why Korea? Why Khmer? Why not Vietnam? Vietnam would be a better choice than Korea and Khmer put together as they represent both East Asian and Southeast Asian culture?

 

[Ogedei_the_Mad]

Yes, I'm ignorant because I'm Asiano-centric, but people should ask themselves are they somewhat too Euro-centric as well?

Good question. It seems that some people seem to think that you can just represent "Asia" with China, Japan, and India, while Europe needs to be represented by every European state in existence.

 

[yewsef]

Those aren't houses in the Sketches, they're long houses. Each of those holds about 30 to forty families, and its a relatively minor city in the sketch. The reason we don't think of Iriqoi cities is because they were all destroyed.

If that city had a population of 100,000 or more and is organize under one leadership then by all means it is a city.

 

[Ecofarm]

Thanks, Ogedei. I can use all the eastern history I can get. Having grown up and had a majority of my education in the US, I'm rather ignorant in eastern history. A brief and informative post it was!

 

[Colossian]

There are greater civilizations in the history

Whats the great? How great? Well-known to you?

 

[yewsef]

Whats the great? How great? Well-known to you?

Greater than what Odegei provided us about Korea, there are MANY. I was talking to Odegei not you anyway. If you have further input regarding Korea, by all means let us know about their achievements.

 

[sylvanllewelyn]

Tributiary and vassal are different things. Japan was once a tributiary nation to China just because the Ming emperors gave away large portions of their national production for face and looking good. It eventually destroyed the Ming economy, that and corruption.

Vietnam and Korea were vassals, in which rebellions were quickly surpressed, not ruthlessly, but promptly. However they were never completely conquered, and could not, because of their ferocity. The Han soldiers could not stand the cold, and the Tang could not both fight the Turks and wage a numerical war against the Koreans, and the latter was a real military superpower. They remained vassals to China, and then Japan, for a long time, but they were never truly defeated, and now flourish from the ancient to the modern.

Have you noticed that Koreans seem to be taller than Southern Chinese, and definitely taller than the Japanese? If you believe in Chinese myth, legends mixed with history, the Koreans were said to be escaped people of the Sheng dynasty, the same lineage as the "Song" nation during the Western Zhou. They were also said to be taller and stronger than the Han Chinese, which considerably delayed the Zhou conquest because they lost every battle when their chariots could not rout the Sheng infantry before the actual combat. Confucius was also a "Sheng" person, and him and his father's show of physical ability was well-documented.

Does it make him a Korean?!

 

[Ogedei_the_Mad]

My post was more directed towards the continued perpetuated ignorant notion that Korea was not an independent civilization and was simply a "part" of China. Saying so quite frankly simply demonstrates a lack of research or laziness on the part of the poster. It's not a bad thing to admit that you don't know much about a the history of a certain area; just don't go denigrating other civilizations before doing research.

You are right of course that there are many worthy contenders to choose from. SE Asia unfortunately has often been left out despite being one of the most important regions in history as the spice trade did after all, bring about the European drive to explore and colonize.

However, aside from being at the center of struggles and wranglings between various powers at various periods of time (the Samguk Period, the Mongol Empire, the Imjinwaeran, early Western encroachment in Asia, Japanese colonialism, the Korean War, etc.), Korea as a civilization has stood the test of time compared to many of the great civilizations in the past and that in itself should merit a place among those included in the Civ series.

EDIT: Gah!!! AGAIN, must I say this - Korea was NOT a "vassal" of China nor was it a "vassal" of Japan! Korean kingdoms were tributary states but acted on their own accord and minded their own affairs. Until the Meiji Period, Japan never successfully projected its power towards the mainland. Prior to the Meiji, the only real major large-scale invasion initiated by Japan was Toyotomi Hideyoshi's in the Imjinwaeran (1592-1598), which was a colossal failure. For much of its history, as a state, Japan was fairly backwater compared to the mainland civilizations and did not seek to vassalize the Korean peninsula. The main "Japanese" threats to the mainland existed only in the form of the Wako/Wokou/Waegu "Japanese" pirates.

 

[NYHunter]

I have no problem with people who don't think Korea deserves to be in the game. But, I take issue with people who think that while supporting Khmer.

I can get into detail but to make it simple the Khmer people were crushed, conquered and colonized. End of story. Any achievements they did have in their time proved to be worthless when it came down to it. Today 90% of Khmer people live in one of the poorest countries in the world and their region.

Korean dynasties have been important throughout history, at least when you look at the development of eastern history. And both modern Koreas today have huge armies, both of which are among the top ten in the world. South Korea is also a very fast growing economy. Export of Korean culture is on the rise. North Korea has in the both the past and currently cause world tensions.

I am sorry. But, if you support the Khmer you have no basis to be against Korea.

 

[ds61514]

EDIT: Gah!!! AGAIN, must I say this - Korea was NOT a "vassal" of China nor was it a "vassal" of Japan! Korean kingdoms were tributary states but acted on their own accord and minded their own affairs.

Eh? There have been cases where Korea (more accurately kingdoms in the Korean peninsula) recognized Chinese authority over them. It wasn't just mere tribute but express acknowledgement of the Chinese Emperor's overlordship; notice that the for many dynasties, the term to denote the ruler of whatever political entity at the time was prominent was usually wang (King), while only in Goryeo did they use the term da wang (Emperor).

Japan was different; their tenno was ranked equally and they never formally acknowledge the superiority of the Chinese huangdi.. The Chinese court might have thought differently, but Japan was too far away for them too care.

Does it make Confucius a Korean?!

Why do people use 19th century ethnic terms to look at the past? Confucius' ethnicity could have been Chinese, Korean or Martian; what is important is that Confucius was huaxia, which denoted the culture of the central plains and which the majority of Chinese today trace their historical heritage.

 

[Bast]

I have no problem with people who don't think Korea deserves to be in the game. But, I take issue with people who think that while supporting Khmer.

I can get into detail but to make it simple the Khmer people were crushed, conquered and colonized. End of story. Any achievements they did have in their time proved to be worthless when it came down to it. Today 90% of Khmer people live in one of the poorest countries in the world and their region.

Korean dynasties have been important throughout history, at least when you look at the development of eastern history. And both modern Koreas today have huge armies, both of which are among the top ten in the world. South Korea is also a very fast growing economy. Export of Korean culture is on the rise. North Korea has in the both the past and currently cause world tensions.

I am sorry. But, if you support the Khmer you have no basis to be against Korea.

This is really ridiculous. Then, why is Canada a G8 country not in civ? It's more successful than Korea in every way.

Historically, Khmer actually has had an Empire. Whereas Korea didn't. NEVER did.

Mind you, not that I support Khmer. There are a lot of other civs that I'd rather see before it.

I just find it funny that Korea's in the game.

 

[Gilder]

Korea is a recognizable Asian country. I had to look up Khmer, and some of the other replacement suggestions posted here.

 

[gettingfat]

I think in most part of the history, Koreans were realistically a "semi-vassal" of China, not to the point losing independence to be a strict vassal, but was under quite strong influence under Chinese. At least their monarchs need to the official recognition from the Chinese government to be fully legitimate.

That's said, in a sense, even using the same term "vassal", most of the time it doesn't mean the same in East Asia when compared to Europe. RELATIVELY, ancient Chinese were much more off-handed when handling their so-called vassals. Formal recognition of the superiority of the Chinese monarch, sending a few of your family members to the Chinese capital for education (strictly speaking, as political hostages to preempt rebellion), paying some symbolic tributes, and once in a while, sending some troops to help out wars and usually that's about it. The tension between Chinese and their "vassals" in ancient time was generally not very high.

This relative moderate approach gives quite a bit of room for the development of the so-called vassal states of China. So even Korea was vassalized it doesn't mean it lost its own identity and chance of normal development. Strong influence from Chinese? Yes; Not a "complete" civ? No. From customs, clothing, cuisine, tech to language and some extent social structure, Korea is quite unique. You show some Korean stuff to a typical Chinese and he/she probably can tell you right away this is non-Chinese.

 

[Bast]

Korea is a recognizable Asian country. I had to look up Khmer, and some of the other replacement suggestions posted here.

Well I didn't have to. But besides that, why should that be a criteria for it being in the game?